|
Activist judge in Nashville
Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS. A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN). “The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.” The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power since October 9. But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m. and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain $1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any assembly activity. “We have a legitimate complaint that is supported by a majority of the American people that there is too much corruption in government,” said one protester, Buck Gorrell, in a statement. “We have a right to assemble to address those complaints. What more appropriate public space is there in Tennessee for that purpose than Legislative Plaza? The state government is imposing arbitrary barriers to our rights under the Constitution.” The “Occupy Nashville” protesters defied the new rules, leading to arrests on Friday and Saturday mornings. The 50 people arrested, however, were released after Night Court Magistrate Tom Nelson refused to sign off on the arrest warrants. The lawsuit (PDF) alleges that state illegally revised the rules controlling Legislative Plaza by fiat in secret and without notice. The complaint also claims the state arrested protesters without probable cause and due process. Tennessee did not oppose the motion for a temporary restraining order, which halts enforcement of the rules until a preliminary injunction hearing scheduled for November 21. “We hope the fact that the State did not contest the temporary restraining order means that it is recommitting itself to safeguarding — not thwarting — public political expression,” said Hedy Weinberg, ACLU-TN Executive Director. |
Activist judge in Nashville
On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote:
Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Maybe, maybe not. What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful protest. What then? Would fleabaggers support that? -- The reason government can't fix the economic problems is government is the problem. |
Activist judge in Nashville
On 10/31/2011 10:14 PM, jps wrote:
Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS. A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN). “The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.” The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power since October 9. But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m. and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain $1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any assembly activity. “We have a legitimate complaint that is supported by a majority of the American people that there is too much corruption in government,” said one protester, Buck Gorrell, in a statement. “We have a right to assemble to address those complaints. What more appropriate public space is there in Tennessee for that purpose than Legislative Plaza? The state government is imposing arbitrary barriers to our rights under the Constitution.” The “Occupy Nashville” protesters defied the new rules, leading to arrests on Friday and Saturday mornings. The 50 people arrested, however, were released after Night Court Magistrate Tom Nelson refused to sign off on the arrest warrants. The lawsuit (PDF) alleges that state illegally revised the rules controlling Legislative Plaza by fiat in secret and without notice. The complaint also claims the state arrested protesters without probable cause and due process. Tennessee did not oppose the motion for a temporary restraining order, which halts enforcement of the rules until a preliminary injunction hearing scheduled for November 21. “We hope the fact that the State did not contest the temporary restraining order means that it is recommitting itself to safeguarding — not thwarting — public political expression,” said Hedy Weinberg, ACLU-TN Executive Director. He did his job. I totally agree with him. These people did not violate the Law. His job is judicial safety valve to prevent overzealous government. I take no position on the issue other than that. You are not talking about political appointees determined to push their agenda. You better than God that you have local Judges and Law Enforcement. They are you. All you are saying is that you have a bias studied or not agaains their protests. Your protests are allowed. So are theirs. |
Activist judge in Nashville
|
Activist judge in Nashville
On 10/31/11 10:43 PM, BAR wrote:
In , says... On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Maybe, maybe not. What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful protest. What then? Would fleabaggers support that? Who is John Gault. If you had read the book, you'd know it was Galt, not Gault. |
Activist judge in Nashville
|
Activist judge in Nashville
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 06:15:09 -0400, X ` Man
wrote: On 10/31/11 10:43 PM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Maybe, maybe not. What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful protest. What then? Would fleabaggers support that? Who is John Gault. If you had read the book, you'd know it was Galt, not Gault. Supply siders who haven't a ****ing clue from whence they came. Clueless, low information voter. |
Activist judge in Nashville
On 11/1/11 2:51 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 06:15:09 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 10/31/11 10:43 PM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Maybe, maybe not. What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful protest. What then? Would fleabaggers support that? Who is John Gault. If you had read the book, you'd know it was Galt, not Gault. Supply siders who haven't a ****ing clue from whence they came. Clueless, low information voter. Their motto: "No need to read the book if you read the bumpersticker." Ms. Rand's books were all the rage at the Susan S. Sheridan Junior High School. |
Activist judge in Nashville
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, jps wrote:
Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS. A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN). “The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.” The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power since October 9. But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m. and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain $1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any assembly activity. Those rules make damn good sense. Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either! |
Activist judge in Nashville
|
Activist judge in Nashville
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 13:08:19 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 07:54:24 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 11/1/11 12:50 AM, wrote: It does make me wonder how long these people would last in Lafayette Park, right outside Obama's front door, in DC. There are almost always demonstrators and protestors in that area, no matter who is president. Some of the demonstrators are really wigged out, though, with signs indicating their displeasure over the Soviet domination of eastern Europe, even though that's been over for some time. DC police, for the most part, are pretty tolerant of demonstrators. We get lots of demonstrations and marches here. I went to school on the 1700 block of G street. I know all about the demonstrators in front of the white house but I guarantee you, if you pitch a tent and refuse to move, you will be in a wagon. The rule in front of the white house is you have to keep moving. And the rule prohibiting tents there should apply in any of the non-camping public parks. |
Activist judge in Nashville
On 11/1/11 4:37 PM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS. A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN). “The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.” The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power since October 9. But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m. and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain $1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any assembly activity. Those rules make damn good sense. Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either! You would have been happy as an Aryan in Germany between 1935 and 1945... |
Activist judge in Nashville
On 11/1/2011 1:10 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 11/1/11 1:08 PM, wrote: On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 07:54:24 -0400, X ` wrote: On 11/1/11 12:50 AM, wrote: It does make me wonder how long these people would last in Lafayette Park, right outside Obama's front door, in DC. There are almost always demonstrators and protestors in that area, no matter who is president. Some of the demonstrators are really wigged out, though, with signs indicating their displeasure over the Soviet domination of eastern Europe, even though that's been over for some time. DC police, for the most part, are pretty tolerant of demonstrators. We get lots of demonstrations and marches here. I went to school on the 1700 block of G street. I know all about the demonstrators in front of the white house but I guarantee you, if you pitch a tent and refuse to move, you will be in a wagon. The rule in front of the white house is you have to keep moving. It was a lot easier before Bush and 9-11 and Bush's fake war on terrorism. Not to worry. Bab Bam is going to change things for you. -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
Activist judge in Nashville
On 11/1/2011 4:37 PM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS. A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN). “The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.” The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power since October 9. But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m. and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain $1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any assembly activity. Those rules make damn good sense. Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either! A miliun dollas? I supose there goin ta ask there parunts to post da bond, eh? By the way, Have you heard specifically, what they are protesting? -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
Activist judge in Nashville
In article ,
says... On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 06:15:09 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 10/31/11 10:43 PM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Maybe, maybe not. What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful protest. What then? Would fleabaggers support that? Who is John Gault. If you had read the book, you'd know it was Galt, not Gault. Supply siders who haven't a ****ing clue from whence they came. Clueless, low information voter. Glad to see the two of you wasting your time reading my drivel. |
Activist judge in Nashville
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 20:28:24 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Maybe, maybe not. What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful protest. What then? Would fleabaggers support that? the productive people..ie the middle class...already pay the taxes. the rich...beloved of the right...pay no taxes |
Activist judge in Nashville
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 22:43:23 -0400, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Maybe, maybe not. What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful protest. What then? Would fleabaggers support that? Who is John Gault. an idiot invented by the moron ayn rand, who wrote fairy tales for right wing children |
Activist judge in Nashville
On 11/1/11 7:02 PM, BAR wrote:
In , says... On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 06:15:09 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 10/31/11 10:43 PM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Maybe, maybe not. What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful protest. What then? Would fleabaggers support that? Who is John Gault. If you had read the book, you'd know it was Galt, not Gault. Supply siders who haven't a ****ing clue from whence they came. Clueless, low information voter. Glad to see the two of you wasting your time reading my drivel. Atlas Shrugged is entirely too long, complex and dull a book for an ex-marine who was posted stateside to read. You seem to be the designated fill-in for Ingersoll, whose house was damaged in the storm, and his now-obvious sockpuppet, iLoogy the "non-boaterer." |
Activist judge in Nashville
bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 20:28:24 -0600, wrote: On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Maybe, maybe not. What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful protest. What then? Would fleabaggers support that? the productive people..ie the middle class...already pay the taxes. the rich...beloved of the right...pay no taxes Can you prove that? It's insane! -HB (As seen on TV!) |
Activist judge in Nashville
|
Activist judge in Nashville
On Nov 1, 5:42*pm, X ` Man dump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote: On 11/1/11 4:37 PM, John H wrote: On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, *wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS. A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN). “The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.” The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power since October 9. But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m. and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain $1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any assembly activity. Those rules make damn good sense. Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either! You would have been happy as an Aryan in Germany between 1935 and 1945...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Are you sure he wasn't? |
Activist judge in Nashville
On 01/11/2011 5:03 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 20:28:24 -0600, wrote: On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Maybe, maybe not. What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful protest. What then? Would fleabaggers support that? the productive people..ie the middle class...already pay the taxes. the rich...beloved of the right...pay no taxes You only think that because you have never invested in yourself to get a good job and saved to become "rich". Just a homey couch slug with a mouth waiting for a handout. -- The reason government can't fix the economic problems is government is the problem. |
Activist judge in Nashville
On 01/11/2011 7:23 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 11/1/11 9:01 PM, wrote: On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:37:50 -0400, John wrote: On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS. A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN). “The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.” The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power since October 9. But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m. and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain $1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any assembly activity. Those rules make damn good sense. Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either! They have the million dollar liability insurance thing in Ft Myers too. (blame lawyers for that) It is actually pretty cheap, considering. I think it was a couple hundred a week or so according to the news here. When you think about all the bad things that could happen, it sounds like a bargain. It's too bad ordinary citizens can't force the financial services industry and corporations to cough up billions for ruining the economy of this country. Funny, your so low you bite the hand that feeds you while voting for the corruption that keeps you down. You are pathetic. Now that bpubharic is back out of jail you should ask it for a date. -- The reason government can't fix the economic problems is government is the problem. |
Activist judge in Nashville
In article ,
says... On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 00:50:27 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, jps wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS. A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing new rules that restricted ?Occupy Nashville? demonstrators? ability to protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN). ?The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because it does not like how people are using a public space,? said ACLU-TN Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. ?Today?s decision is the first step in restoring demonstrators? free speech rights.? We probably have a better test case going on in Ft Myers. There is a long standing law against camping in the park and pretty much anywhere but a designated (zoned) camp ground within the city. You also need a permit to do much more than visit the park and it closes at night. It is going to be interesting when they try to make the case that "camping" is "speech". If the protesters win, the result might be chilling. It would say that if you have something to gripe about, you can camp anywhere you want. It does make me wonder how long these people would last in Lafayette Park, right outside Obama's front door, in DC. And I suppose I would be allowed to camp at Lake Anna State Park if I have a gripe or two. Sounds good to me! So you like the jackboot Nazi type of government, huh? |
Activist judge in Nashville
|
Activist judge in Nashville
In article , dump-on-
says... On 11/1/11 7:02 PM, BAR wrote: In , says... On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 06:15:09 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 10/31/11 10:43 PM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Maybe, maybe not. What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful protest. What then? Would fleabaggers support that? Who is John Gault. If you had read the book, you'd know it was Galt, not Gault. Supply siders who haven't a ****ing clue from whence they came. Clueless, low information voter. Glad to see the two of you wasting your time reading my drivel. Atlas Shrugged is entirely too long, complex and dull a book for an ex-marine who was posted stateside to read. You seem to be the designated fill-in for Ingersoll, whose house was damaged in the storm, and his now-obvious sockpuppet, iLoogy the "non-boaterer." Hey, Harry, where did you get the idea that I'm a non-boater? And where did you get the idea that I'm loogy? |
Activist judge in Nashville
On 11/2/2011 8:55 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , dump-on- says... On 11/1/11 7:02 PM, BAR wrote: In , says... On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 06:15:09 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 10/31/11 10:43 PM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Maybe, maybe not. What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful protest. What then? Would fleabaggers support that? Who is John Gault. If you had read the book, you'd know it was Galt, not Gault. Supply siders who haven't a ****ing clue from whence they came. Clueless, low information voter. Glad to see the two of you wasting your time reading my drivel. Atlas Shrugged is entirely too long, complex and dull a book for an ex-marine who was posted stateside to read. You seem to be the designated fill-in for Ingersoll, whose house was damaged in the storm, and his now-obvious sockpuppet, iLoogy the "non-boaterer." Hey, Harry, where did you get the idea that I'm a non-boater? And where did you get the idea that I'm loogy? He's fishing for a confession. Keep him guessing. He isn't all that bright. -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
Activist judge in Nashville
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 17:38:30 -0400, Drifter wrote:
On 11/1/2011 4:37 PM, John H wrote: On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS. A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN). “The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.” The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power since October 9. But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m. and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain $1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any assembly activity. Those rules make damn good sense. Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either! A miliun dollas? I supose there goin ta ask there parunts to post da bond, eh? By the way, Have you heard specifically, what they are protesting? The government. I'm speaking of the one headed by BamBam. |
Activist judge in Nashville
On 11/2/2011 5:33 PM, John H wrote:
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 17:38:30 -0400, wrote: On 11/1/2011 4:37 PM, John H wrote: On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS. A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN). “The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.” The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power since October 9. But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m. and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain $1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any assembly activity. Those rules make damn good sense. Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either! A miliun dollas? I supose there goin ta ask there parunts to post da bond, eh? By the way, Have you heard specifically, what they are protesting? The government. I'm speaking of the one headed by BamBam. Bam who? -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
Activist judge in Nashville
On 02/11/2011 3:42 PM, Drifter wrote:
On 11/2/2011 5:33 PM, John H wrote: On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 17:38:30 -0400, wrote: On 11/1/2011 4:37 PM, John H wrote: On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS. A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing new rules that restricted “Occupy Nashville” demonstrators’ ability to protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN). “The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because it does not like how people are using a public space,” said ACLU-TN Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. “Today’s decision is the first step in restoring demonstrators’ free speech rights.” The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power since October 9. But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m. and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain $1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any assembly activity. Those rules make damn good sense. Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either! A miliun dollas? I supose there goin ta ask there parunts to post da bond, eh? By the way, Have you heard specifically, what they are protesting? The government. I'm speaking of the one headed by BamBam. Bam who? Mr Blow America's Money, 0bama. -- The reason government can't fix the economic problems is government is the problem. |
Activist judge in Nashville
|
Activist judge in Nashville
|
Activist judge in Nashville
On 03/11/2011 6:52 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , says... On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 17:38:30 -0400, wrote: On 11/1/2011 4:37 PM, John H wrote: On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:14:04 -0700, wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Wonder if that'll filter up to the SCOTUS. A federal judge Monday afternoon ordered Tennessee to stop enforcing new rules that restricted ?Occupy Nashville? demonstrators? ability to protest in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN). ?The state cannot arbitrarily create restrictive policies just because it does not like how people are using a public space,? said ACLU-TN Legal Director Tricia Herzfeld. ?Today?s decision is the first step in restoring demonstrators? free speech rights.? The protesters had been camped at Legislative Plaza in downtown Nashville to protest the economic and political consolidation of power since October 9. But on October 27, Tennessee enacted new rules without any public review process that eliminated their right to gather after 4:00 p.m. and implemented a 10:00 pm curfew on the plaza. The state also required protesters to pay use and security fees and to obtain $1,000,000 in liability insurance coverage prior to engaging in any assembly activity. Those rules make damn good sense. Shouldn't be any bitchin' about 'em either! A miliun dollas? I supose there goin ta ask there parunts to post da bond, eh? By the way, Have you heard specifically, what they are protesting? The government. I'm speaking of the one headed by BamBam. John's so narrow minded and one sided that he can't bring himself to spell Obama correctly. Notice you never heard him call Bush any demeaning nicknames. 0bama (zero-bama). All mouth, nothing but debt for results. -- The reason government can't fix the economic problems is government is the problem. |
Activist judge in Nashville
|
Activist judge in Nashville
|
Activist judge in Nashville
On 11/5/2011 1:58 PM, jps wrote:
On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 12:19:54 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 20:28:24 -0600, wrote: On 31/10/2011 8:14 PM, jps wrote: Looks like some judges may still be interested in protecting people's constitutional rights... Maybe, maybe not. What if productive people withheld income tax from DC in peaceful protest. What then? Would fleabaggers support that? Lame insults and grade-school name-calling - the trademarks of a true liberal. Are you drunk or do you favor non-sequiturs over sense? Careful now. That's your girlfriend Plume you're talking to. -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:38 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com